Help

This subforum is for critical evaluation of Wikipedia articles. However, to reduce topic-bloat, please make note of exceptionally poor stubs, lists, and other less attention-worthy material in the Miscellaneous Grab Bag thread. Also, please be aware that agents of the Wikimedia Foundation might use your evaluations to improve the articles in question.

For example, the cookie-expiration line is out of date. For the last 2.5 years, they ostensibly expire in two years. However, Google admits that as the expiration date approaches, they are automatically renewed for another two years. To get the cookie to expire, you have to avoid all Google sites for the entire two years, or wait until your hard disk heads for the dumpster, or delete them yourself.

The "Response" section says this: "A May 2003 PC World article described Google Watch as "perhaps justifiably paranoid",[4] however Google's defenders assert that Google Watch offers very little evidence to back up its allegations.[5]" But these citations are six years old! In the seven years since Google-Watch.org began, there has been a tremendous increase in the number of Google critics.

If Wikipedia must mention Google Watch, note that it's already mentioned and linked in this Wikipedia article. That's okay by me, because my name isn't on that one.

The Wikipedia article on Google-Watch.org is such junk that I decided a year ago to hide the whois for the site behind a proxy. It's downright embarrassing to have my name in that Wikipedia article. But I'm banned from Wikipedia and cannot nominate it myself.

(By the way, a person who is banned from Wikipedia should have the right to demand that any article that names him or her be edited to exclude his or her name.)

Well, thanks y'all, and I'll cross my fingers. If it gets deleted, I may once again stick an email address on the site, and take it out of the whois proxy, and also put a proper phone number on the whois. Then once again I may get the occasional call from a reporter as Google (hopefully someday soon) gets hit with a ten-ton antitrust suit from the Justice Department.

What I cannot handle is some idiot reporter reading the Google_Watch article on Wikipedia and then contacting me. If this happens, his mind is already polluted by the time he is able to find me, which is why I had to make myself difficult to locate.

Google just announced their free, public, super-fast DNS service. My guess is that soon Chrome will use it as the default, and soon after that Firefox will too, so as not to lose their lucrative Google contract when it comes up for renewal in 2011 (it's worth about $90 million a year to Mozilla Corporation).

Think of all the user tracking Google can do!

In the meantime, you have to stick their DNS servers ( 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 ) into your browser yourself, which at the moment makes it look like a cool public service instead of yet another evil plan for world domination.

That it's notable seems to have been confirmed in past deletion discussions - if there are problems with the content, identify and fix them. --Kotniski (talk) 20:47, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment: What agenda do you have to push, Kotnitski? Remember, this is not the first time you've been hanging around articles relating to Daniel Brandt. This was you in April 2008, trying to get Daniel Brandt listed on a surname page listing notable people with the last name "Brandt". I see this as an attempt at baiting, and it's obvious that you have an agenda to push regarding this. So, what is it? Paz y Unidad (talk) 20:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

To stop Wikipedia's readers from being deprived of good information just because a few obsessed people don't like it, I suppose. What's yours? You seem very new here to be nominating controversial articles for deletion.--Kotniski (talk) 21:11, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

But seriously, what is with Kotniski? Normally he edits Polish-related articles, and keeps a low profile. Many times in the past when one of Daniel's unwanted pages came up for AFD, he's in there, fighting like hell to keep it. Always in parallel with John Nevard.....

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Fri 4th December 2009, 11:15pm

But seriously, what is with Kotniski? Normally he edits Polish-related articles, and keeps a low profile. Many times in the past when one of Daniel's unwanted pages came up for AFD, he's in there, fighting like hell to keep it. Always in parallel with John Nevard.....

Kotniski is Dr John Catlow, Senior Lecturer, Institute of Linguistics, Department of Information Systems, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poland. Put "dr john catlow" into Google and, with the help of the "Translate this page" link, you will find him. He has a PhD in math from England, and he's into software development on the Wikipedia bugzilla mailing list. Haven't found a birthdate or pic yet.

Kotniski is Dr John Catlow, Senior Lecturer, Institute of Linguistics, Department of Information Systems, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poland. Put "dr john catlow" into Google and, with the help of the "Translate this page" link, you will find him. He has a PhD in math from England, and he's into software development on the Wikipedia bugzilla mailing list. Haven't found a birthdate or pic yet.

Daniel, I know my saying this is generally the kiss-of-death for these things, but please don't put him up on Hivemind. Not right now, please!! It's a hard enough battle right now and doing that is only going to make things worse.

Kotniski is Dr John Catlow, Senior Lecturer, Institute of Linguistics, Department of Information Systems, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poland. Put "dr john catlow" into Google and, with the help of the "Translate this page" link, you will find him. He has a PhD in math from England, and he's into software development on the Wikipedia bugzilla mailing list. Haven't found a birthdate or pic yet.

Daniel, I know my saying this is generally the kiss-of-death for these things, but please don't put him up on Hivemind. Not right now, please!! It's a hard enough battle right now and doing that is only going to make things worse.

Please don't

You don't mean to say that anyone would want to stop Wikipedia Review's readers from being deprived of good information just because a few obsessed people don't like it?

Daniel, I know my saying this is generally the kiss-of-death for these things, but please don't put him up on Hivemind. Not right now, please!! It's a hard enough battle right now and doing that is only going to make things worse.

Please don't

Sorry, but this guy has been stalking me, and I'm fed up with it. Do you have any idea what that's like?

Daniel, I know my saying this is generally the kiss-of-death for these things, but please don't put him up on Hivemind. Not right now, please!! It's a hard enough battle right now and doing that is only going to make things worse.

Please don't

Sorry, but this guy has been stalking me, and I'm fed up with it. Do you have any idea what that's like?

Funny you should ask that. Showing up at your place, is he?

I don't need to explain to you, Daniel, that doing this is only going to bring all the usual idiots out of the woodwork to ensure the stupid article is now going to be kept? Nothing like a little spite and vengeance to bring 'em all out. Why the fuck do I bother?

Maybe, but I would have no way of knowing because he doesn't have the decency or the courtesy to use his real name! It wasn't easy to find his name or his pic. But now if he shows up, at least I'll know what's happening.

Maybe, but I would have no way of knowing because he doesn't have the decency or the courtesy to use his real name! It wasn't easy to find his name or his pic. But now if he shows up, at least I'll know what's happening.

Yeah, but you knew all that before you decided to put him up on Hivemind. So why do it at all? It's just shooting yourself in the foot.

I don't need to explain to you, Daniel, that doing this is only going to bring all the usual idiots out of the woodwork to ensure the stupid article is now going to be kept? Nothing like a little spite and vengeance to bring 'em all out. Why the fuck do I bother?

Spectators of the meta-game know that Bringing All The Usual Idiots Out Of The WikiWoodWork (BATUIOOTWWW) is the name (and the acronym) of the game.

Yeah, but you knew all that before you decided to put him up on Hivemind. So why do it at all? It's just shooting yourself in the foot.

It's a public service. The lowest form of life in cyberspace are those who harass living persons who don't want to even be mentioned in Wikipedia, and who do this while hiding behind a screen name, claiming that they're building an encyclopedia when all they're doing is playing games at the expense of others. It's worth a bullet in the foot to expose creeps like this.